Google+
Close

The Corner

The one and only.

Start With Scalia



Text  



From an e-mail regarding the Texas sodomy case (“stare decisis,” btw, refers to the presumption in favor of sticking with precedent):

It is usually good in cases like this to read Scalia’s dissent first:

“Today’s opinions in support of reversal do not bother to distinguish–or indeed, even bother to mention–the paean to stare decisis coauthored by three Members of today’s majority in Planned Parenthood v. Casey. There, when stare decisis meant preservation of judicially invented abortion rights, the widespread criticism of Roe was strong reason to reaffirm it . . . Today, however, the widespread opposition to Bowers, a decision resolving an issue as intensely divisive as the issue in Roe, is offered as a reason in favor of overruling it.”



Text  


Sign up for free NRO e-mails today:

Subscribe to National Review